Air Quality Forecasting: Recent Advancements and Continuing Challenges
description
Transcript of Air Quality Forecasting: Recent Advancements and Continuing Challenges
Air Quality Forecasting:Recent Advancements and Continuing
Challenges
William F. RyanDepartment of Meteorology
The Pennsylvania State [email protected]
MARAMA Annual Meeting, Philadelphia, February, 2010http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~wfryan/marama/ryan-marama-phl-2010.pptx
Key Advancements Since 2002
• Timely Access to Near Real-Time Data– AirNow (www.airnow.gov) and AirNowTech
• Improvements in Weather Forecast Models– Better resolution (WRF)– Ensembles of forecast models (SREF)
• Specialized Numerical Forecast Models– Back trajectory models (HYSPLIT)– Air quality models (O3 and PM2.5)
Near Real Time PM2.5 Data from AirNow
http://www.airnowdata.org/pmfine/hourly.html
Time Series of O3 Concentrations
Hourly O3 observations from rural, high elevation monitors. These dataprovide accurate information on the current regional “load” of O3.
This information is critical to forecasting tomorrow’s local air quality.
Back Trajectory Forecasts Identify Source Regions for Tomorrow’s Air Quality
HYSPLIT Back Trajectory
Colored lines show the forecast pathof air parcels that will reach PHLat 1200 UTC (8 am) on the forecastday (July 16) at three levels above the ground (500, 1000, 1500 m).
The path is 24 hours in duration with dots giving position at6 hour intervals.
The bottom panel shows the forecastvertical motion of the parcels.
NOAA-EPA O3 Forecast Model
Model forecasts available twice a day, see also: http://www.weather.gov/aq/
PM2.5 Forecast Models
Environment Canada, GEM-MACH
Barons Advanced Meteorological Systems
An Example of the Value of New Forecast Products
August 5th was forecast to be sunny and very warm - conducive to O3 formation.Back trajectories are from climatologically “dirty” location. But, early afternoon
O3 concentrations along path of trajectory are relatively clean!
Low Upwind O3 Concentrations Due to Organized Thunderstorm System (MCS) Earlier that Day
Result: While O3 was high in PHL thefollowing day, no locations reached the
Code Orange threshold.
Ensembles of Models Can Give Probability of Strong Thunderstorms
Ensembles are repeated runs of a model using slightly different initial conditionsor model physics. Contours are probability (%) of thunderstorm tops > 37,000 ft.
Forecast for 2100 UTC(5 pm EDT) on July 25
Example: Saturday, July 25, 2009
1215 EDT 1645 EDT
Ozone Forecast Skill in PHL Steady Last 7 Years
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 20090
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
MdAEBias
Erro
r Mea
sure
(in
ppbv
)
Median Absolute Error (MdAE) and Bias for PHL O3 Forecasts
But Skill in Code Orange Cases Declined Last Two Years - Especially in 2009
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 20090.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
False AlarmThreatHit
False Alarm: Code Orange forecast, not observed; Threat: Overall skill measurefor threshold forecasts; Hit: Code Orange forecast and observed.
Changes in Ozone ClimatologyShenandoah National Park – Big Meadows
1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 20080
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
20
43
2925
71
57
26
3438
11 10 1115
8 70N
umbe
r of D
ays w
ith 8
-h O
zone
>=
70
ppbv
Number of Days ≥ 70 ppbv (8-hour ave). Note: No days in excess of 70 ppbv in 2009
Changes in O3 ClimatologyFrequency of Severe O3 Cases in PHL
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 20090
5
10
15
20
25
30
> 115 ppbv> 105 ppbv> 96 ppbv
Days
Abo
ve P
eak
Ozo
ne T
hres
hold
2009 is not blank, there just weren’t any Code Red cases!
Statistical O3 Model Bias in PHL (2003-2009)
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 20090
2
4
6
8
10
12
R0302
Fore
cast
Bia
s (pp
bv)
Bias in forecasts of peak domain-wide 8-hour O3 by two MLR models used in PHLand trained on pre-NOx SIP Rule historical data.
Shortcoming of Statistical Models
• The skill of statistical models is primarily due to the close relationship between peak O3 and maximum surface temperature (Tmax).
• This relationship is “frayed” in the post-NOx SIP Rule world:– For 1993-2002, 58% of variance in peak O3 in PHL is “explained”
by Tmax
– For 2003-2009, only 44%.– In 2009, older statistical models showed no skill (Brier Skill Score
< 0). Statistical models trained on post-NOx SIP data showed some skill.
By 2009, Numerical O3 Models Outperforms Traditional Statistical Models
Forecast NAQC R0302 R20090
2
4
6
8
10
12
BiasMed AEMean AE
Type of Forecast
Erro
r Mea
sure
(ppb
v)
NAQC: NOAA-EPA Model; R0302: MLR Model Trained on pre-NOx SIP data;R2009: MLR Model Trained on post-NOx SIP data
NAQFC Model Performance Steady in 2009
%bias %MAE %rms0
5
10
15
20
25
200720082009
Error Measures
Nor
mal
ized
Erro
r (in
%)
But “False Alarm” Rate in 2009 was more than double previous years
Comments on the 2009 O3 Season
• 2009 was a cool and wet summer. Low frequency of “O3 conducive weather” locally and regionally. Similar to 2000 and 2004.
• “Standard” high O3 weather – westward extension of the Bermuda High, sustained westerly transport from the Ohio River Valley – was infrequent.
• This weather pattern contributed to historically low frequency of high O3 cases but there may also have been lower emissions of O3 precursors due to the economic recession.
Percentile Rank of Temperature and Precipitation for 3 Recent Low O3 Summers
<2000> <2004> <2009>0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
TempPptn
Perc
entil
e Ra
nk (%
)
Average percentile rank of temperature and precipitation for PA, DE, NJ forsummer months (JJA). Warmest and wettest are 100th%ile.
Weather Conditions and Code Orange O3 in Philadelphia in Recent Cool Summers
<2000> <2004> <2009>0
5
10
15
20
25
30
> 90 Fpptn > 0.1"> 76 ppbv
Num
ber o
f Day
s Abo
ve T
hres
hold
2009 Not Remarkably Different from 2000 and 2004 Except for Frequency of Bad Air Days
Shenandoah NP PM2.5 Daily Average Concentrations (May-August, 2004-2009)
N Median(µg/m3)
Mean ± 1 σ(µg/m3)
Ratio (Days > 20 µg/m3)
Ratio (Days > 30µg/m3)
2004-2008 487 14.2 15.1 ±7.8 0.23 0.04
2009 116 9.5 9.8 ± 4.3 0.02 0.00
O3 is very sensitive to temperature and rainfall (cloud cover) while PM2.5 is not.PM2.5 concentrations, on average, vary little from summer to summer.
In 2009, however, mean PM2.5 concentrations at SNP were 33% lower thanthe recent average and the frequency of days ≥ 20 µgm-3 was 90% lower.
Frequency of “Bad” PM2.5 Days in PHL Was Remarkably Low in 2009
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 20090
5
10
15
20
25
6
1213
78
0
15
18
23
1718
0
> 35.5> 30.0
Num
ber o
f Day
s Abo
ve P
M2.
5 Co
ncen
-tr
ation
Thr
esho
ld (m
icro
g/m
3)
Note: Data for 2004-2008 uses gravimetric filter monitors (FRM) while 2009uses 24-average from continuous monitors.
Motor Vehicle Emissions and Recessions
Measure is year-over-year rolling 12-month average change in vehicle milesTravelled (VMT). Periods of economic recession shaded in blue.
http://www.calculatedriskblog.com
Coal and Electricity Consumption in 2009
• U.S. Electricity Consumption. Retail sales of electricity to the industrial sector from January through September 2009 were down by about 12 percent compared with the same period last year, similar to the decline in the U.S. manufacturing production index.
• U.S. Coal Consumption. Coal consumption by the electric power sector fell nearly 12 percent for the first 9 months of 2009 in response to lower total electricity generation coupled with increases in generation from other sources, natural gas, hydropower, and wind.
• (Source: EIA, http://www.eia.doe.gov, December 8, 2009)
Coal and Electricity Consumption in 2009
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, December 8, 2009http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/steo/pub/contents.html
Conclusions
• Air quality forecasting tools and guidance have improved over the past decade.
• Changes in O3 precursor emissions due to the NOx SIP Rule have lowered peak O3 concentrations.
• Poor air quality days (Code Orange) have become much less common and, therefore, more difficult to forecast.
• Numerical forecast models have adapted better than traditional statistical methods to the change in emissions.
• The summer of 2009 was anomalous in terms of both weather conditions and precursor emissions.
Acknowledgements
• Air quality forecasting and research in the Philadelphia Metropolitan area is supported by the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (www.dvrpc.org) and the States of Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware.
• Additional research support was provided by the Air and Radiation Management Administration of the Maryland Department of the Environment (http://www.mde.state.md.us).